The regular meeting of the Utah Transportation Commission, held at the Old Midway Town Hall, 140 West Main Street, Midway, Utah, was called to order at 9:05 a.m. by Commission Chairman Glen E. Brown. He welcomed those attending.

Approval of MinutesCommissioner Lewis moved to approve the minutes of the September 19, 2003, Commission meeting held in Salt Lake City, Utah. It was seconded by Commissioner Bodily and approved.

Local Area Presentation by Region ThreeChairman Brown turned the time over to Commissioner Clyde to introduce local officials attending and the local area presentation. Tracy Conti, Region Three Director, gave the local area presentation consisting of projects in Wasatch County and the Uintah Basin. There was also brief discussion regarding relocation of the maintenance stations in Vernal and Heber City. The time was then turned back to Chairman Brown.

Public CommentsMayor Bill Probst of Midway expressed appreciation for having the Commission in Midway. He said their presentation today will be an overview of what was presented during the tour yesterday. Robyn Pearson, Heber Valley Chamber of Commerce, distributed a handout and said it is a synopsis of an enhancement project for improvements to Midwayís Main Street, which they feel very strongly about. Additional traffic will be directed to Main Street due to several things, such as the designation of SR-113 as a scenic byway, the further development of the Wasatch Mountain State Park, and a lot of economic development. There are many activities that are making this a four seasons region. Wasatch County was the fastest growing county in the state last year, and in the last decade has been in the top three, eight of those years. Growth is a feature they deal with on a daily basis, so theyíve got to improve the safety features on Main Street.

Shaun Seager from Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG) said they provide technical assistance to Wasatch, Summit and Utah Counties. MAG has been in contact with UDOTís Region Three director to discuss the types of improvements that would be appropriate for Main Street. There were some solutions identified through the open house process held in Midway. Some of the solutions identified include a left turn lane, a curb and gutter system, a storm drainage system, sidewalks, bike lanes, and a trail connection that would connect with the trail the Commission rode on yesterday. Also, there would be bulb outs and crosswalks at intersections, intersection improvements on Main Street at Center Street and at River Road, a Ďsafe routes to schoolí facilities plan, overhead electrical utility relocation, pedestrian period street lighting, and tree and landscape planting. The drawing in the handout shows the added turn lane, the two travel lanes, bike lanes, parallel parking areas, a landscaped strip, five-foot sidewalks, and additional landscaping to the right of way line. Those are the improvements MAG has helped Midway come up with.

Courtland Nelson, Director of State Parks, said they are excited about their partnership with the county and the cities in the area. Next June, State Parks anticipates opening a new 36-hole golf course at Soldier Hollow, and they expect to see 20,000 to 30,000 more cars, in addition to the traffic that already goes up to Soldier Hollow for other activities. They also see in the very near future, that the road over from Cascade Springs will be paved, which will bring additional traffic from American Fork and Provo Canyon. As part of their work with the communities, they are very excited about their future trails system, which is very important in the Heber Valley. On summer weekends, people are looking for outdoor activities, and the valleyís residents are heavy patrons of the trail. The trail system would be a great part of the infrastructure, as it works with the regular transportation system. Those problems need to be resolved in the front end of the planning process to avoid having to retrofit them later.

Mr. Pearson noted that this enhancement project is a continuation of a series of events that have brought them to this point in time. Each segment was properly planned and envisioned so itís a continuation of a process and not just an event. They also want to make sure that what they do in the future compliments the Olympic vision and magnificence. Mr. Pearson said the handout also has a page showing the budget forecast for the project. They are not requesting a handout, but are requesting support because the community is deeply invested in this as well. They envision at least 50% of the total project cost coming from community resources. They hope to move forward on a construction timetable, starting next spring. Itís important for them to know that they can sequence the activities in a proper and professional way.

Commissioner Bodily asked if the city felt that one lane of traffic in each direction with a turn lane and parking is sufficient, or would it be wise to have two lanes of traffic in each direction? Mr. Pearson responded that they hope what they do will not preclude that option as the need arises. The turn lane is the significant safety issue; however, as improvements are made, something in the planning process may necessitate needing an additional lane of traffic. There was additional discussion regarding the bike lanes, the roundabout, and the back of curb enhancement.

Craig Lacey, Heber Valley Railroad Executive Director, said they are an independent non-profit state agency, owned by the state but receives no operating funds from the state. The 618, which is the locomotive the Commission rode behind yesterday, is owned by UDOT. They are governed by a Board of Directors that is appointed by the Governor, and they employ seven full-time employees and about 65 part-time/seasonal employees. The Railroad was developed as an economic engine in the valley and has contributed over $1 million to the local economy. They provide educational opportunities and had over 75,000 passengers in 2002. They have also developed into a year-round operation.

Mr. Lacey said they are approaching a point in time where they need to do some significant work on Locomotive #618. The train has not had significant running work since 1957, so theyíre basically wearing the machine out. It needs to have a federally mandated boiler evaluation and rebuild, they need to replace the wheels on the driving tires, replace the bearings on the drive-axles, do suspension work, renovate the air system, and replace the wheels on the tender. This locomotive is almost 100 years old and has operated all of its life in Utah and Southern Idaho. They will be submitting a request for a $200,000 enhancement grant. The railroad will be providing their portion as well. Unfortunately, their operating revenues do not cover large repair costs. The last item is the Columbia Steel #300. This engine spent many years on display in Provo. Its last assignment was to haul molten pig iron from the Ironton plant to Geneva Steel. The locomotive was partially dismantled when it was put on display, so it requires more work. They are looking at boiler tubes and exhaust system inside the boiler, they need to do some sheet metal work on the cab, and replace the cab and the side rods. This locomotive is a vital part of Utah history. One of the situations they have found themselves in is needing to have two locomotives operating in order to provide a continual schedule of steam locomotives. What they are planning to do with the enhancement request is to spread it over two complete years, doing the 618 project, if they receive the funding, in 2004, and then the 300 in 2005. They feel this fits perfectly within the historical preservation and transportation aspects of the enhancement funds.

Mark Anderson, Heber City Manager, spoke about their concern with the lack of separation between the Daniel Road intersection on Highway 189 and the US-40 intersection. The traffic often backs up and creates a safety issue. They would like UDOT to do some engineering work to find some possible solutions. Their other concern has to do with the increased traffic expected on SR-113 between Heber City and Midway. Because itís one of the more scenic streets Heber City has that is tree lined, their vision is to turn it into somewhat of a commercial/residential zone with law offices, chiropractors, and those kinds of things that are for residential use. That section of road in Heber City has been overlayed so many times the grade is significantly higher than the curb. As a result, itís a maintenance project theyíd like to turn into an enhancement project, so they intend to apply for enhancement funds. With the replacement curb and sidewalk, and replacement lighting, it will make it an attractive, functional and safe corridor. The sidewalks are really in an unsafe condition right now, and there are problems with the curbs as well. This is their top priority. Commissioner Clyde referred to the comment made about having UDOT come up with some engineering solutions for Daniel Road, and said it seems to him that it should be a city issue with what needs to be done there. The problem has existed a long time, and UDOT hasnít done anything to create it. The city should bestepping forward with what they would like to see done there because, as he sees it, itís going to require a major relocation of Daniel Road. Heís reluctant to say UDOT should step forward on this.

Annie McMullen, Wasatch County Council, welcomed the Commission to Wasatch County. She thanked UDOT for the work that has been done on so many of their challenging intersections, specifically the Wallsburg and Charleston intersections. Councilmember McMullen referred to two maps that were displayed and said one map is a close up of the North Village area, the other is the greater Jordanelle and Midway snapshots. Their first concern is the interchange at US-40 and River Road. With the transfer of itís funds to Provo Canyon, the interchange has lost its priority, so they would like to encourage the Commission to keep it on the STIP because of the extreme growth Wasatch County is experiencing. Itís going to become a very important interchange. Their second concern is at the College Way intersection. Currently, there are about 600 students enrolled at the college, with anticipated growth of up to 3,000 in three to five years. Their goal is to create safe, flowing traffic in and out of the college. That intersection would be a great place for a signal. Finally, Coyote Lane will become a very integral outlet for additional village growth and in trying to minimize access points along Highway 40. Itís going to be an important intersection as well because as the college grows and development fill the north part of Heber City, theyíre going to see increased traffic flows there too. Councilmember McMullen said they are very encouraged that UDOT has secured property on Old Highway 40 for a maintenance shed. Itís important to keep the shed on the valley floor. She encouraged UDOT to continue their efforts with Provo Canyon, and they are also pleased with the trail system through Heber City.

Darrell Cook, Mountainland Association of Governments, welcomed the Commission to the Wasatch Back portion of MAG. There are a lot of exciting and progressive kinds of things happening in the Wasatch County area, and one of the things MAG is trying to do in this valley is to get into transportation planning, of which they are in the very early stages. Itís kind of a demonstration/pilot project. They will be committing transportation planning resources to this valley and helping them coordinate and address the road pressures here. They will be putting together a Wasatch County long range plan to develop priorities that will be submitted to the Transportation Commission for TIP improvements, etc., creating a relationship that will tie Wasatch County individual communities to the collective regional perspective. Itís a long-term process.

Planning and ProgrammingAeronautics -- Airport Project Changes -- Provo Airport TowerPat Morley, Director of Aeronautics, introduced Kirk Nielsen who will be their new Airport Planner. He then referred to the information in the Commissionís binders and said the summary sheet is followed by the information for 12 different projects. The notes for the Commission are on the last page. The front page has the first six items that are revised projects. The Commission has previously approved each of these projects; however, there have been some revisions. Three of those revisions, at Halls Crossing, Loa, and Milford, are a result of the FAA coming forth with additional funds, which increased the entitlement for those airports. At the Heber City Airport, the previous project was strictly for land acquisition for hangar relocation. Now they will be able to include fencing and taxi lane design. For the Parowan Airport, it was originally thought the project itself would be for $150,000, but as they got further into it, they realized they underestimated the cost and scope of the apron expansion project. The FAA stepped forward with an additional $100,000 to go towards the completion of the Parowan project. For the Spanish Fork/Springville project, there is a lot of expansion work being done, and the FAA is sending an additional $800,000.

Mr. Morley said of the next six new projects, two of them are federal projects Ė Cedar City and St. George Ė with no state dollars going to them at all. The Monument Valley Airport is a very unique rural airport, with 20,000 enplanements a year. The state is stepping forward with $28,000 to help grade and improve the airport and improve safety standards. The new project at the Parowan Airport includes a crack seal, seal coat, and re-marking, with a state match of $73,000. The most important project is the tower at Provo Airport. They received $800,000 from Congress to be applied to the tower. The Senate earmarked an additional $1 million, but they donít know if theyíll actually receive it until the process in Washington DC is completed. Hopefully they will be successful. The State would contribute $250,000 from the Aeronautics Restricted Account, and Provo City would be responsible for the balance. Commissioner Warnick asked what would happen if they didnít receive the $1 million. Mr. Morley replied that there have been some discussions about a loan from Aeronautics that Provo City would pay back, once the tower is completed. There have also been discussions about scaling back the size of the tower.

Commissioner Lewis suggested addressing the first six items, then addressing the others in a different manner.

Commissioner Lewis moved to consider the first six Aeronautics projects, with the adjustments that have been requested. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Clyde and approved.

Commissioner Lewis suggested addressing the Cedar City and St. George Airports separately as well, as there are no state funds involved.

Commissioner Lewis moved to approve the Cedar City and the St. George Airport requests, as they do not entail any state funds. It was seconded by Commissioner Warnick and approved.

Commissioner Clyde said he thinks the Provo Tower is a separate item and should also be addressed separately from the remaining items.

Commissioner Clyde made a motion to approve the proposed funding for the Provo Airport, recognizing there may be some changes due to the Congressional element, and that this will be the limit of the UDOTís commitment. If the other funds do not become available, adjustments will then have to be made. Commissioner Wilson seconded it and the motion was approved.

Commissioner Wilson moved to approve the remaining three projects. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wells and approved.

Programming of Efficiency MoniesMax Ditlevsen, Program Development Director, quickly reviewed the efforts UDOT took statewide to look at efficiencies. He said there is a schedule of projects that were identified for the $7 million of state efficiency funds to be programmed. Each of the regions provided their priorities of where to best apply this money. They were to consider projects already in the program but sitting in Concept Development (CD), and that the projects be in categories where they have a difficult time finding money. Spot improvement projects were also to be considered. The selection of projects today is not a final action, but they will be brought back with other projects in an amendment at the November meeting as part of a formal amendment process. Mr. Ditlevsen said a correction needs to be made to the information in the binders and pointed out that there are two projects not listed on the first page of the handout. They are in the narrative portion of the handout with the descriptions, below item 8, under the heading of possible spot improvements. The first project listed is in Region Two and is at the SR-111 and SR-173, not SR-154, intersection where there is an alignment problem. Itís been in the spot improvement plan for some time; however, there has been a delay in acquiring the right of way. There is not enough money in the program. Although they do have $850,000, they believe it could cost as much as $1.8 million. An additional $500,000 to $600,000 would provide enough money for some serious negotiations for the property.

Commissioner Wells asked if the projects listed were in order of priority by region. Mr. Ditlevsen said they are, as much as possible. Chairman Brown was curious as to why there is a $14 million project listed when there is only $7 million available. Mr. Ditlevsen said that he just wanted to show the Commission that is a Region Two priority. They knew they werenít going to be able to get to that kind of a project with this money. It does show that the needs far outweigh the money available. Director Njord said he could talk about every one of these projects, and theyíve tried to look at this from an objective perspective. Obviously they can't touch them all, but there are opportunities to do some really good things across the state as a result of the efficiencies that have been identified within the Department. Itís important for the employees to see some very significant work taking place as a result of their sacrifice. He said he could speak to any project there might be a question about, and has recommendations as well.

Chairman Brown asked Director Njord to respond to two things. First, there are three projects that say Ďnew.í How does the Commission defend their process of setting priorities in the STIP, and all the work that has gone into developing it, but then suddenly there is a request for three new projects? There must be some urgency associated with those three projects. He knows how difficult it is to move something ahead of all the projects that have been waiting and waiting. Secondly, how does the Department recommend the Commission deal with trying to spread the funds across the regions, but also address the more urgent things that are out there? Director Njord responded that new projects are not unusual, and if this were part of their regular process of updating the STIP, they would be considering new projects for CD. The Commission has received public input about some of these projects as they have traveled around the state. One example is the project on SR-73. Also, the project on SR-23 is a project where they have an opportunity that has been created that they didnít have before. Chairman Brown stated that the Commission does the very best they can in the planning process, but they canít keep things so locked in concrete that they can't deal with the changing needs and dynamics of their responsibilities. The dynamics change so quickly that they have to be able to respond. They do their best, but still have to tweak the system. Director Njord said as far as the region requests go, he believes it would be wise for the Commission to spread things around the state to a certain degree, not necessarily measuring it out in equal increments, but to look at projects that are important in each region.

Commissioner Bodily commented on project #1. Itís a project of opportunity, as Director Njord said, which brings it to the forefront where itís tied into a current project on Highway 91. This project would entail rotomilling Highway 91 and using that asphalt material to overlay Highway 23, and they could bid it as one project. Commissioner Wilson commented on project #13 and said Highway 10 is not eligible for a lot of other types of funding, and they have had a significant increase in the amount of coal truck traffic on that highway from I-70 to Emery the last few years. Itís really narrow and itís been several years since that section of road had any work done on it. Itís a badly needed project. Commissioner Wells suggested that each region be given the same amount of money, and if the region directors had some contingency money they wanted to put towards some of the projects they feel are most important, then they could come back to the Commission with their top priority and go from there. Commissioner Lewis commented on the project on Highway 18 going north out of St. George. He said itís a highway that has become very busy, and part of it has already been widened. But, there is another section that would be very important to take care of as well. He also said Commissioner Wellsí suggestion is something to think about. Mr. Ditlevsen noted that a number of the regions have already assigned out most of their contingency monies. Commissioner Warnick commented about project #3 and said this is one of the busiest interchanges in the state. The region director is trying to find other ways to address the problem, but there may be other solutions as well. Commissioner Wells asked for the Directorís recommendations.

Director Njord said he has given this a lot of thought, and there are some really good things that can be done by spreading the money around. There are projects he would like to recommend to the Commission. Project #1 on Highway 23 is a project of opportunity. If they can throw a small amount of money towards this recycling project, they can kill two birds with one stone. Theyíll fix Highway 91, and at the same time resurface SR-23. The recommendation is to not allocate $820,000, but provide $500,000 and ask the region to come up with the rest. The region director has said he would be able to do that. Project #3 is on SR-232 from SR-126 to Gordon Avenue, and is a very congested portion of road near the Layton Hills interchange. For this project, they would like to do some ramp modifications at the interchange and change the striping on SR-232. Director Njord said he thinks they can improve the operations and reduce congestion in that location. In Region Two, the project Mr. Ditlevsen mentioned previously is the one he would like to speak to. Itís at the intersection of SR-111 and 5400 South, and is a project theyíve wanted to work on for a long time, but it has been difficult to address because of the right of way issues. If this project could receive half a million dollars, the region could work with the property owners and get this project moving ahead. The next recommended project is #9 on SR-73. UDOT is currently in the process of adding a climbing lane from Redwood Road to the gravel pits, but if more resources were added to that project, they could continue with those types of passing opportunities along SR-73, addressing a very serious safety concern. Although $2.5 million would allow them to go quite a distance, his recommendation would be for $1.5 million to go towards that project.

Director Njord said project #10 is in Roosevelt City and is an important intersection project. They have not been able to find the right category of funding to address the concerns there, but since these are state funds, this project could be addressed quite rapidly. Half a million dollars on this Roosevelt City project could really improve a safety issue for the folks in rural Utah. Project #13 is on SR-10, of which Commissioner Wilson spoke most appropriately. Itís a very significant piece of road in that part of the state, and itís important that something be done there. For just under $2 million, the condition of that pavement could really be improved. The last project is #15 on SR-18. There is a need for extending some passing lanes on that highway, and for a small investment of $450,000, they can get a large benefit on SR-18. Director Njord said the total of all the projects he has talked about add up to just under $7 million, so that would be his recommendation to the Commission.

Commissioner Clyde said one of the issues he has concerns with is on SR-73. He doesnít deny the fact that there is a basic need to do something there. But the way this has evolved is what he wishes could be addressed, such as when someone develops raw land Ė which he thinks has enormous economic value Ė then dumps a lot of traffic onto the state system without considering the system itself and expecting the state to take care of it. Heís not sure how theyíre ever going to address that, but hopes they can in the future. Commissioner Clyde also spoke about SR-10 and the utilization of those roads in the future. He said the state is going to be required to pay for them when a lot of resources are going to be exported on the stateís system. Again, heís not sure how to address those things. He does agree that the monies should be spread around, but he also depends heavily on the Department to recommend what should be done. He appreciates the perspective Director Njord has given. There was some discussion about allocating the extra $150,000 to the project on SR-111, and the Commission agreed to that increase.

Commissioner Bodily made a motion that the Commission accept the recommendation of Director Njord, and designate the $7 million as follows: $500,000 to project #1; $1.5 million to project #3; $650,000 to the unnumbered project on SR-111; $1.5 million to project #9; $500,000 to project #10; $1.9 million to project #13; and $450,000 to project #14. It was seconded by Commissioner Wilson and approved unanimously.

Commissioner Wilson mentioned project #16 on SR-6 and said they always need to be mindful of the needs on SR-6; however, there are several projects going on there and work is continuing on the environmental document, so he feels comfortable where things are at the present time. He appreciates it being on the list though. Chairman Brown asked when all this will happen. Mr. Ditlevsen reported that it is immediate and it is next year. The $2 million in FY 04 and $5 million in FY 05 make up the $7 million. Again, the motion today is the Commissionís selection; next month will be the formal amendment for these projects. And, this is not one time money. This will have an impact for quite some time.

Corridor Preservation Funds- Richard K. and Loraine C. Bourne Ė US-89Lyle McMillan, Chief of Right of Way, said this first request is for the Bourne property on US-89, which will be part of the ramp at the 400 North interchange in Kaysville in phase one of the US-89 plan. The property owners have run a business there and are attempting to relocate that business, but have run into challenges trying to sell the property. The advisory council has reviewed this application and recommends that the Commission approve the purchase of the property. Itís 1.5 acres of ground and the listing price is $340,000. There will be an independent appraisal done before an offer is made.

Commissioner Warnick made a motion to approve the purchase of the property. It was seconded by Commissioner Clyde and approved.

- Sherril H. Taylor Ė Mountain View CorridorMr. McMillan said the next item is the Sherrill Taylor property on the Mountain View Corridor at approximately 4800 West and 12600 South. Mr. Taylor recently sold his property to a developer. However, there were 3.2 acres that the developer identified as undevelopable and did not purchase them, leaving Mr. Taylor with an irregular shaped piece of property that will be impacted by the Mountain View Corridor. The property owner has also had some health issues and is retirement age, and therefore is asking UDOT to purchase the remainder of the property that is needed for the corridor. Mr. McMillan noted that the developer purchased the property at $52,000 an acre. UDOT could get an independent appraisal, or could review the appraisal the developer got.

Commissioner Wells made a motion to approve the purchase of the property. It was seconded by Commissioner Bodily and approved.

Informational ItemsTransportation Task Force Activities UpdateDirector Njord said they would like to briefly update the Commission on some activities of the Transportation Task Force that might be of interest, and then turned the time over to Mr. Ditlevsen for the update. Mr. Ditlevsen explained that there is a draft report that will soon be out from the Task Force regarding their work. HB 310 established this task force, and they were to come together and make recommendations on several issues. He talked to the Commission about the discussion that took place at the last meeting regarding having some type of legislation that would guide the Department and the Commission in how they deal with local governments in project selections where the local governments would come forward with a significant amount of revenue. Commissioner Wells expressed her concerns about where this process is heading. She sees it leading to ďthose who have will get; those who donít have will not get.Ē She explained that as a general rule, cities spend general fund dollars on roads. The Class C funds they get are not enough, so itís not like they have piles of money sitting there. Sheís also concerned about what the Task Force is expecting from the Commission. Commissioner Clyde added that an incentive needs to be there for cities to participate more in funding things that need to be done. However, he never wants to see it come to ďthose who have, get and those who donít have, donít get.Ē They have to be able to level that out or address the issue in an equitable manner.

Commissioner Brown said his concern is with the ľ of ľ funds. That will get them to the ďhaves and have-notsĒ quicker than anything. Itís a big pot of money. And if someoneís in an area of the state that doesnít generate much money, they canít get anywhere. Itís a bad piece of legislation and getting worse. Mr. Ditlevsen said there are examples across the nation where some very significant transportation improvements are being done and the locals are adding to what is there from state or federal sources. It does take care of those local needs. What they want to do is to try to understand the circumstances that were in place when those decisions were made, and if they were successful. The Department will continue to work with the Commission to help develop guidelines for the process.

Enhancement ProgramJohn Quick from Program Development provided an update on the Enhancement Committee. He said notice has been put out that UDOT is accepting applications for enhancement projects, which are due to be received by the middle of December. They want to get the committee organized so they can be prepared to function once those applications are received. They hope to review the applications in January, and then bring a list of enhancement projects to the Commission for approval in February. Mr. Quick said there are two people being considered for the Enhancement Advisory committee. One is from Salt Lake, the other is from Southern Utah. If there are any objections, they can select from a pool of other names they have. Mr. Quick said the composition of the committee includes himself, a Transportation Commissioner, the Departmentís bicycle/pedestrian planner and la
ndscape architect, John Knudsen, State Parkís non-motorized trail administrator, and the two people being considered Chairman Brown said since this is the Commissionís advisory committee, they need to be informed about it so theyíre not left in the dark. Heíll think about it and then appoint a Commissioner to the committee.

Upcoming MeetingsThe next regular Transportation Commission meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 21, 2003, in the Emery County Commission Chambers, 95 East Main, Castle Dale, Utah. The following meeting dates and locations have also been scheduled: